Ninety Percent CTS Across 340 problems
Short and sweet today:
16f/137s =153 Monday @ 89.542%.
15f/121s =136 Tuesday @ 89.971%
3f / 48s = 51 Wednesday@ 94.118%
--------------------------------------
Short term cumulative averages at Chess Tactical Server:
34f/306s =340 @ 90.0%
1502.6
This puts me precisely and joyfully @ 90.000% for the last three days consolidated. Data point not an accident!
But will it age me so fast that I cannot live to be 116, as this woman to our left did?
Doña Josefina Salguero, nacida en el año de 1890, tuvo 12 hijos. 9 ya murieron.Conversar con ella es como si uno lo hiciera con una enciclopedia.
Fano_Quiriego's photos, Flickr Photos
I had been tossing around asking Wormstar and Temposchlucker if we all could arrive at conscensus as maybe a good way for all of us to cite our CTS progress, so that at least us low RD regular users who blog here could have the same lingua franca, when I noticed Wormster using this f after his record here. He very smartly and cogently represented it:
5f/63 = 92.1%
1521
I suggest we build on his tag, but express performances nearly identically and instead say:
5f/58=63 @ 92.1
1521
If anyone has a more clear way of saying it, I am open and will follow along, please. Just one persons opinion.
"somewhere to nowhere", by pxpxpx's photos;
his comment:
"i often feel like, i am in somewhere to nowhere."Time present and time past are both perhaps present in time future. And time future contained in time past." ---Eliot. Time is a dynamic unity.In the in-between position, we flow with the current, the flow of it. It seems logical that we tend to think about a certain point in the linear time and strive to try to predict it. It is akin to point out the possible endpoint of the flight path of an arrow. But as a part of the flow, the stream of time, our deeds inevitably affect those we've contact with and impart a factor which affects the possibility of the time stream. Only if we are determined to focus on the very moment we are living now rather than evermore looking forward to the next future moment will we have the ability of staying in peace and living the moment to the fullest. If you elude the present, you will miss the curtain to the future. Henceforth, watch carefully what transpires when we "await"."逝者如斯, 而未嘗往也; 盈虛者如彼, 而卒莫消長也. 蓋將自其變者而觀之, 則天地曾不能以瞬; 自其不變者而觀之, 則物與我皆無盡也. 而又羨乎? " ---赤壁賦
*pic: a classroom in National Taiwan University
16f/137s =153 Monday @ 89.542%.
15f/121s =136 Tuesday @ 89.971%
3f / 48s = 51 Wednesday@ 94.118%
--------------------------------------
Short term cumulative averages at Chess Tactical Server:
34f/306s =340 @ 90.0%
1502.6
This puts me precisely and joyfully @ 90.000% for the last three days consolidated. Data point not an accident!
But will it age me so fast that I cannot live to be 116, as this woman to our left did?Doña Josefina Salguero, nacida en el año de 1890, tuvo 12 hijos. 9 ya murieron.Conversar con ella es como si uno lo hiciera con una enciclopedia.
Fano_Quiriego's photos, Flickr Photos
I had been tossing around asking Wormstar and Temposchlucker if we all could arrive at conscensus as maybe a good way for all of us to cite our CTS progress, so that at least us low RD regular users who blog here could have the same lingua franca, when I noticed Wormster using this f after his record here. He very smartly and cogently represented it:
5f/63 = 92.1%
1521
I suggest we build on his tag, but express performances nearly identically and instead say:
5f/58=63 @ 92.1
1521
If anyone has a more clear way of saying it, I am open and will follow along, please. Just one persons opinion.
"somewhere to nowhere", by pxpxpx's photos;
his comment:
"i often feel like, i am in somewhere to nowhere."Time present and time past are both perhaps present in time future. And time future contained in time past." ---Eliot. Time is a dynamic unity.In the in-between position, we flow with the current, the flow of it. It seems logical that we tend to think about a certain point in the linear time and strive to try to predict it. It is akin to point out the possible endpoint of the flight path of an arrow. But as a part of the flow, the stream of time, our deeds inevitably affect those we've contact with and impart a factor which affects the possibility of the time stream. Only if we are determined to focus on the very moment we are living now rather than evermore looking forward to the next future moment will we have the ability of staying in peace and living the moment to the fullest. If you elude the present, you will miss the curtain to the future. Henceforth, watch carefully what transpires when we "await"."逝者如斯, 而未嘗往也; 盈虛者如彼, 而卒莫消長也. 蓋將自其變者而觀之, 則天地曾不能以瞬; 自其不變者而觀之, 則物與我皆無盡也. 而又羨乎? " ---赤壁賦
*pic: a classroom in National Taiwan University
posted by transformation at 2:13 AM
7 Comments:
my shorthand is purely due to pragmatic calculation of success rates for session. 5f/54 = 91.0%, meaning 5 failed of 54 problems, and the percentage is 5/54 - 1 = -0.9074, which gives negative value, but is the easiest to calculate using a calculator. otherwise you'll have to input total number of problems twice. and the number of solved problems is redundant, as the same info is already inversely in the number of failed ones. so, your way has three unknowns in the formula, and mine has only two. it's 'faster'.
us graphic engineers are naturally lazy that way, every operation takes valuable cpu cycles. :)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
good luck on your journey(s). I do think it is a good idea to split chess and your other interests into 2 seperate blogs.
dear takchess, im not at all offened by your suggestion. in fact, tempo and generalkaia said the same thing, so i already started a second blog, and plan several so that i have a way of externalizing my already not inextensive perambulations (sp?).
question. i am mindfull of what you say. but at the same time, im classically trained as an architect, and also a scholar. chess is the way i navigate if not bridge many words, and experiment broadly with my mind, onLine work, memory, learning, etc.
my education included poetry, film, materials science, study with gurus and zen masters, gurdjieff teachers, a stint on wall street, fine cooking, etc. so there is a limit to how confined i can be.
so in a constructive sense, is there any chance you could elaborate? i promise to listen. id be particularly greatfull since you are obviously very inteligent and i think must be very talented.
are you saying the Kaizen stuff is too big, or leave out the photos, or put any and all ancelary stuff elsewhere? or contract it but keep the breadth?
many folks here say they really enjoy my posts, and im obviously serious about chess improvment and do put my hours in heavily, so not a hanger-on-er, but wish to entertain and enrich and expand, and not chess only. but hard to seperate yet keep related.
seperate blogs seem wholely seperate.
dk
I don't really use CTS, so don't have an opinion on how to cite progress.
Some blogs are chess only. Some are a mixture of chess with philosophy and other things.
It's all good.
If the citation of progress is so esoteric that only someone using CTS could understand it, or if you'd need a translation key to understand it, it's probably not good for a blog.
For instance, Tempo mentions 'RD' or something. I have no idea what that is. Standard deviation? Entropy? Correlation coefficient? Mass?
Blue,
sorry, I didn't notice that. It's rating deviation. It is used in ratingcalculations at FICS and CTS. You can find more information at http://chess.emrald.net/ratinginfo.php
Post a Comment
<< Home